Obama Already Backs Down

[Coggeh]

Already he is bowing to pressure from the bourgeois in washington and is keeping the Bush Tax cuts till 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/us/politics/24transition.html?bl&ex=1227762000&en=ab700f6adb9c70e5&ei=5087%0A

does anyone remember that stupid half hour show he had ? i think his words were something like "I'll do away with the Bush Tax cuts immediately and give them to people that really need them ".... how did anyone buy this sh*t ?

[Drace]

2011, haha lolz...

In his defense, I believe he did say "We might not get everything down in the first term.." :)

[audiored]

O, he will be forced to back down on a lot more than just unjust tax breaks for the super rich. That will be the least of it.

Far more upsetting is keeping Robert Gates at the Dept of Defense. Look him up, he wanted to carpet bomb Nicaragua in the 1980s to save the western hemisphere from the commies.

I have no interest in defending Obama. But, I'm going to take a wait and see for his first year or so to get a sense of where he puts up a fight and where he caves.

[ZeroNowhere]

Well, he's not really putting up much of a fight. He's already amplifying the 'bridging boundaries' thing, that is, lowering expectations without saying directly, "Ha ha, I fooled you. Ha."

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

What did he back down from? Promises/lies he made while campaigning? What else is new? All capitalist politicians do that. That's one of the reasons its important to thing at things in from a class perspective.

Despite the rhetoric, Obama and his party represent the capitalist class. Don't be surprised when he acts in their interests.

[zimmerwald1915]

What did he back down from? Promises/lies he made while campaigning? What else is new? All capitalist politicians do that. That's one of the reasons its important to thing at things in from a class perspective.

Despite the rhetoric, Obama and his party represent the capitalist class. Don't be surprised when he acts in their interests.
We're not. People who supported him and will now be disillusioned (I know a few) might very will be, and we should be prepared to captialize on that disillusionment.

In other words, we should get ready to feed off the tears of the Obamatrons.

[Pogue]

Can we expect to see Obama sell out?

YES WE CAN

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

The whole thing is that talking about him "backing down" and "selling out" fosters the illusion that he ever stood for working people to begin with. We've got to be clear with our message (which we should have been putting forward since the election circus began): Obama represents the ruling class and that's who he serves. Capitalism is a system based on exploitation and organized to generate profit, and it cannot be tweaked to meet the needs of the laboring masses.

[ZeroNowhere]

Can we expect to see Obama sell out?

YES WE CAN
It is a change that we can believe in!


Obama represents the ruling class and that's who he serves.
Of course, but we're speaking in more general terms of just going against what he supposedly stood for earlier, and such.

[JohnnyC]

He was always a capitalist traitor, if he was a true socialist he would never get a chance to become a president of USA.

[fabiansocialist]

Well, he's not really putting up much of a fight. He's already amplifying the 'bridging boundaries' thing, that is, lowering expectations without saying directly, "Ha ha, I fooled you. Ha."

Listen to the rhetoric coming from the Democrats: the word in vogue now is "continuity," and not "change." Presently "continuity" is being used to justify all the new appointments (the usual suspects, and I never expected anything else). Pretty soon the word will be used for not changing Bush policies. It would be an idea to keep on Bush and Cheney as consultants so as to make the "transition" as seamless and "continuous" as possible. Other words that will be trotted out will be "moderation," "bipartisanship," and the "need to reach out."